[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Subversion Histroy question

From: Ryan Schmidt <subversion-2010a_at_ryandesign.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 14:07:11 -0600

On Jan 6, 2010, at 12:31, Andreas Hoegger wrote:

> Yes I do. You can imagine if 150 developers have been working for 5 years nobody will use 'blame'/'annotate' commands except for you feel infinitely bored at least with version 1.4 (it would take hours). Is there really nobody having the same problems?

You're saying you're using Subversion 1.4 and "svn blame" takes hours to run? That doesn't sound like it should be.

I use "svn blame" probably daily in my work on the MacPorts project. It's not slow. We use Subversion 1.6 now, but I don't remember "blame" ever being slow; it returns in seconds. Our repository has over 62,000 revisions and is 7.5 years old. We have over 120 registered committers, but probably only a few dozen are particularly active at the moment. But "blame" is very helpful to me in trying to figure out why a file says what it says. Just a couple days ago I used "blame" to research the complete 2-year history of a particular line of code, to try to understand why it was there (and not because I was bored):

http://trac.macports.org/ticket/20586#comment:10
Received on 2010-01-06 21:07:53 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.